Todd Smith v. Warden Dunlap
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 0:15-cv-02538-DCN Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000016562]. Mailed to: Todd Smith. [16-7267]
Appeal: 16-7267
Doc: 5
Filed: 02/03/2017
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7267
TODD SMITH,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN DUNLAP,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(0:15-cv-02538-DCN)
Submitted:
January 31, 2017
Decided:
February 3, 2017
Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Todd Smith, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald John Zelenka, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, William Edgar
Salter,
III,
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Columbia,
South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-7267
Doc: 5
Filed: 02/03/2017
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Todd
Smith
seeks
to
appeal
the
district
court’s
order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition.
not
appealable
unless
a
circuit
certificate of appealability.
A
certificate
of
justice
or
The order is
judge
issues
a
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
appealability
will
not
issue
absent
“a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
relief
on
the
demonstrating
district
merits,
that
court’s
debatable
or
a
When the district court denies
prisoner
reasonable
assessment
wrong.
satisfies
jurists
would
of
the
v.
McDaniel,
Slack
this
standard
find
constitutional
529
U.S.
by
that
the
claims
is
473,
484
(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the
prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural
ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable
claim of the denial of a constitutional right.
Slack, 529 U.S.
at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Smith has not made the requisite showing.
a
certificate
dispense
with
of
appealability
oral
argument
and
dismiss
because
2
Accordingly, we deny
the
the
appeal.
facts
and
We
legal
Appeal: 16-7267
Doc: 5
contentions
Filed: 02/03/2017
are
adequately
Pg: 3 of 3
presented
in
the
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?